There certainly is an ethical strain of communitarianism, but there is also a communitarianism that I would definitely say is a political ideology, though they aren't always the same. How are you defining ideology here?
I'm not entirely sure how I would define ideology (it being one of those notoriously slippery concepts), but I think I would demand a little bit more than the position (that I agree with, btw) that community is basically a good thing, that individuals can't be understood properly without reference to it, and that policy ought to be shaped in reference to these facts. There is certainly no such thing as a communitarian political movement, and (significantly) the only self-declared communitarians in existence are intellectuals, most of which have other ideological positions.
If you can, I recommend seeking out a Japanese sociopolitical treatise from the early nineteenth century called 'Hitori kangae', and then some of Charles Taylor's stuff. Good introductions to old-style right-communitarianism (or, the sort of instincts a couple hundred years ago that any sort of 'communitarian ideology' comes from, sort of like Edmund Burke for conservatism and liberalism except there really wasn't much of it in the West at that point) and modern left-communitarianism of the sort that I identify with (Taylor was actually an NDP candidate for several offices in the sixties and seventies before devoting himself to philosophy full-time).
About the only recent communitarian-identified elected leader that I can think of is Jan Peter Balkenende, which...it's safe to say that's a little worrying and not really an ideal association to have. Rita Süssmuth I think also has ties to that set of ideas. Bill Clinton claimed to have communitarian leanings (or, at least, support aspects of Amitai Etzioni's philosophy) but I don't think many people would argue that he actually put such into practice very much at all. (I should point out that Etzioni is not really one of my favorites anyway.)
